9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thin the limitation period, but only need to be dispatched within the specified period. Therefore, the technical grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. Addition u/s 68 - Assessee was not given any benefit of telescoping with regard to the withdrawals made by him. The assessee has also contended that he is deriving income from screen printing activities and the same were deposited in Kotak Mahindra Bank. It was stated by the assessee that the notice u/s. 142(1) was served on the assessee in the fag end of limitation period for completion of assessment, hence, was not in a position to furnish the necessary proof/evidences. Admittedly, in this case, the assessment has been completed on a best judgment basis. Therefore, assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant has been provided reasonable opportunity and opportunity provided was not sufficient opportunity. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) having held that the appellant has not maintained any books of account ought to have held section 68 of the Act is not applicable. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) ought to have considered the withdrawals from the bank as available for re-deposit. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the explanation of appellant that he was carrying on business in screen printing and deposits were made out of said business. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought not to have rejected the explanation since there was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act was served on the assessee. On merits it was contended that cash withdrawals were available for re-deposit. It was stated that the assessee was carrying on the business of screen printing and other odd works, the receipt of which was utilized for cash deposit. The assessee had also filed a written submission, which was forwarded to the A.O. for his remand report. The CIT(A) on receipt of the A.O.'s remand report, called for assessee's objection/rejoinder. The CIT(A) after pursuing the rejoinder of the assessee, rejected all the issues raised in the appeal and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(A) held that the assessee was given adequate opportunity of hearing before the A.O., hence, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not comply with any of notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the I.T. Act. Hence the A.O. was forced to complete the assessment u/s. 148 r.w.s. 144 of the I.T. Act. It was submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that the assessee has not explained the source of cash deposits, hence, the orders of the Income Tax Authorities needs to be confirmed. 7. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act was dispatched on 31.03.2018 in the address given by the assessee in the PAN portal. Since the notice was returned unserved, the same was served through affixture. The learned Standing Counsel has produced the assessment records to prove that the notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act was dispatched ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
